The Girl and the Man, from Hills Like White Elephants. essays

The Girl and the Man, from Hills Like White Elephants. essays In Hills Like White Elephants the author begins with a description of the place where the story develops; a rural town in Spain, where the two main characters, a man and a girl, are seated at a restaurant drinking beer as they wait for a train. While seated in the table the girl notices distant hills on the other side of the town, and instantly says that they look like White Elephants. The mans unimpressed response along with the girls reaction triggered a tension between the parties that eventually would lead to one very delicate topic. The tension between them kept rising while they were drinking, which lead to the ordering of a few more beers, and eventually on the third drink, the man raises the subject of an operation hes encouraging the girl to have. As the conversation developed it became apparent that they were talking about an abortion. Offering his unconditional support and friendship to the girl, the man encouraged the girl to go ahead and do the operation as planned. She would ensure him that theyd go on as before accorded. The girl is rather inexperienced and new to the operation, which can also be applied to her maturity and boldness. Certainly the girl is unsure about having the operation; shes young, inexperience and naive about the abortion. She does not seem to know much about the consequences and risks of it, but still remains fairly aware of them. Though shes not completely sold on it the man keeps manipulating and convincing her about having it, saying that hes know lots of people who have done it and if she does not want to do it, she does not have to. In addition, she does not know if things will be the way they were before, and whether the man will still love her. All these show a lack of character and security from the girls side, since the only things she cares about are their romantic relationship, the m ...

G.K. Chestertons A Piece of Chalk

G.K. Chesterton's 'A Piece of Chalk' One of the most prolific British authors of the early 20th century, G.K. Chesterton is best known today for his novel The Man Who Was Thursday (1908) and his 51 short stories featuring the amateur detective Father Brown. In addition, he was a master of the essay     called the only literary form that confesses, in its very name, that the rash act known as writing is really a leap in the dark. The word essay comes from the French word essayer, meaning to try or attempt. In the preface to his essay collection Tremendous Trifles (1909), Chesterton encourages us to be ocular athletes: Let us exercise the eye until it learns to see the startling facts that run across the landscape as plain as a painted fence. In this fleeting sketch from that collection, Chesterton relies on two common items brown paper and a piece of chalk as starting points for some thought-provoking meditations. A Piece of Chalk I remember one splendid morning, all blue and silver, in the summer holidays when I reluctantly tore myself away from the task of doing nothing in particular, and put on a hat of some sort and picked up a walking-stick, and put six very bright-colored chalks in my pocket. I then went into the kitchen (which, along with the rest of the house, belonged to a very square and sensible old woman in a Sussex village), and asked the owner and occupant of the kitchen if she had any brown paper. She had a great deal; in fact, she had too much; and she mistook the purpose and the rationale of the existence of brown paper. She seemed to have an idea that if a person wanted brown paper he must be wanting to tie up parcels; which was the last thing I wanted to do; indeed, it is a thing which I have found to be beyond my mental capacity. Hence she dwelt very much on the varying qualities of toughness and endurance in the material. I explained to her that I only wanted to draw pictures on it, and th at I did not want them to endure in the least; and that from my point of view, therefore, it was a question, not of tough consistency, but of responsive surface, a thing comparatively irrelevant in a parcel. When she understood that I wanted to draw she offered to overwhelm me with note-paper. I then tried to explain the rather delicate logical shade, that I not only liked brown paper, but liked the quality of brownness in paper, just as I like the quality of brownness in October woods, or in beer. Brown paper represents the primal twilight of the first toil of creation, and with a bright-colored chalk or two you can pick out points of fire in it, sparks of gold, and blood-red, and sea-green, like the first fierce stars that sprang out of divine darkness. All this I said (in an off-hand way) to the old woman, and I put the brown paper in my pocket along with the chalks, and possibly other things. I suppose every one must have reflected how primeval and how poetical are the things that one carries in ones pocket; the pocket-knife, for instance, the type of all human tools, the infant of the sword. Once I planned to write a book of poems entirely about things in my pockets. But I found it would be too long, and the age of the great epics is past. With my stick and my knife, my chalks and my brown paper, I went out on to the great downs... I crossed one swell of living turf after another, looking for a place to sit down and draw. Do not, for heavens sake, imagine I was going to sketch from Nature. I was going to draw devils and seraphim, and blind old gods that men worshipped before the dawn of right, and saints in robes of angry crimson, and seas of strange green, and all the sacred or monstrous symbols that look so well in bright colors on brown paper. They are much better worth drawing than Nature; also they are much easier to draw. When a cow came slouching by in the field next to me, a mere artist might have drawn it; but I always get wrong in the hind legs of quadrupeds. So I drew the soul of a cow; which I saw there plainly walking before me in the sunlight; and the soul was all purple and silver, and had seven horns and the mystery that belongs to all beasts. But though I could not with a crayon get the best out of the landscape, it does not follow that the landscape was not getting the best out of me. And this , I think, is the mistake that people make about the old poets who lived before Wordsworth, and were supposed not to care very much about Nature because they did not describe it much. They preferred writing about great men to writing about great hills, but they sat on the great hills to write it. The gave out much less about Nature, but they drank in, perhaps, much more. They painted the white robes of their holy virgins with the blinding snow, at which they had stared all day. ...The greenness of a thousand green leaves clustered into the live green figure of Robin Hood. The blueness of a score of forgotten skies became the blue robes of the Virgin. The inspiration went in like sunbeams and came out like Apollo. But as I sat scrawling these silly figures on the brown paper, it began to dawn on me, to my great disgust, that I had left one chalk, and that a most exquisite and essential chalk, behind. I searched all my pockets, but I could not find any white chalk. Now, those who are acquainted with all the philosophy (nay, religion) which is typified in the art of drawing on brown paper, know that white is positive and essential. I cannot avoid remarking here upon a moral significance. One of the wise and awful truths which this brown-paper art reveals, is this, that white is a color. It is not a mere absence of color; it is a shining and affirmative thing, as fierce as red, as definite as black. When, so to speak, your pencil grows red-hot, it draws roses; when it grows white-hot, it draws stars. And one of the two or three defiant verities of the best religious morality, of real Christianity, for example, is exactly this same thing; the chief assertion of religious morality is that white is a color. Virtue is not the absence of vices or the avoidance of moral dangers; virtue is a vivid and separate thing, like pain or a particular smell. Mercy does not mean not being cruel, or sparing people revenge or punishment; it means a plain and positive thing like the sun, which one has either seen or not seen. Chastity does not mean abstention from sexual wrong; it means something flaming, like Joan of Arc. In a word, God paints in many colors; but he never paints so gorgeously, I had almost said so gaudily, as when He paints in white. In a sense our age has realized this fact, and expressed it in our sullen costume. For if it were really true that white was a blank and colorless thing, negative and non-committal, then white would be used instead of black and grey for the funereal dress of this pessimistic period. Which is not the case. Meanwhile, I could not find my chalk. I sat on the hill in a sort of despair. There was no town near at which it was even remotely probable there would be such a thing as an artists colorman. And yet, without any white, my absurd little pictures would be as pointless as the world would be if there were no good people in it. I stared stupidly round, racking my brain for expedients. Then I suddenly stood up and roared with laughter, again and again, so that the cows stared at me and called a committee. Imagine a man in the Sahara regretting that he had no sand for his hour-glass. Imagine a gentleman in mid-ocean wishing that he had brought some salt water with him for his chemical experiments. I was sitting on an immense warehouse of white chalk. The landscape was made entirely of white chalk. White chalk was piled more miles until it met the sky. I stooped and broke a piece of the rock I sat on: it did not mark so well as the shop chalks do, but it gave the effect. And I stood there in a trance of pleasure, realizing that this Southern England is not only a grand peninsula, and a tradition and a civilization; it is something even more admirable. It is a piece of chalk.

Tesla Motors Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Tesla Motors - Assignment Example The firm also markets electric power train components that include lithium ion battery packs to the firms making autos such as Toyota and Daimler. The chief executive officer focuses on making the tesla firm to be an independent automaker that aims at eventual offers thus making the cars affordable to the average consumer. This facilitates the selling of the products to a greater percentage of people due to the high demand from its affordability. The tesla motors core business is designing, manufacturing, and selling of electric automobiles. This is facilitated by the concept of embracing the modern technology that also promotes innovative ideas and activities. Yes, the company is diversified in developing complementary activities such as provision of charging points for the electric motors. They also deal will the designing and manufacturing of batteries that are for replacement when the initial ones are wasted. The scope of the activities from the tesla motors is felt both locally and internationally (Cheney, Margaret, Robert, & Jim, 76). It focuses on the concept of limiting pollution of the environment and air by lack of pollution from the engines of motors that use either petrol or diesel. The idea is ideal for hindering the effects that cause global warming. Prevention of global warming is appropriate for boosting agricultural production that is the main backbone of gross domestic product. The main characteristics of the industry are ideas from the perspective of electricity. They include the activities such as structuring engines that are computerized, the use of chargeable batteries, and promoting emission free automobiles. These characteristics are due to the appropriate embrace of the modern technological activities in the production sector. The tesla motors incorporation is an organization that has not yet fully establish in the competitive market. This is due to the

Text analysis Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 1

Text analysis - Essay Example ing at his background, and experience on matters dealing with fashion, we can therefore denote that Malcolm Barnard is highly qualified to write a book on fashion. Fashion Theory, a reader is a very popular book by Malcolm Barnard. This book traces the beginning of fashion in the 15th century. From this book, we can denote that Barnard took an interest in the study of fashion, carefully analyzing the trends of the fashion industry for over the last 30 years. This book contains a collection of surveys, and essays and contextualizes the manner in which a range, and a number of disciplines have developed theories for purposes of explaining the complexity, astonishing variety, and the beauty of fashion (Barnard, 2007). Themes that Malcolm Barnard covers in this book include gender and social identity, communication, consumption, erotic, and individualism. Barnard Manages to collect information from a variety of important writers and experts on fashion, identifying the ideas that they stand for, and theories that these writers advocate for (Barnard, 2007). For example, Barnard brings forth the ideas of Edward Sapir, who wrote on Fashion in 1931. This is found in chapter three of the book, which is titled Fashion and History. This chapter traces the emergence of fashion from the periods of 1760, to 1937, through a fashion circle referred to as the recurring cycle (Barnard, 2007). From this article, we can denote the fashion industry is not a recent issue, and it has evolved over a period of time. From this chapter, we can also denote that fashion occurs in a recycled manner, that is the fashion trends that occurred in the 15th century, can be reflected in the 20th century (Barnard, 2007). This observation by Barnard is right, and it is still depicted in the modern times. Take for example the Afro Hair style which was popular in the 1970s, to 1980s. During the 1990s, this hairstyle no longer became popular; however, in the periods of 2000s, people are starting to

Monopoly - economics Essay Example for Free

Monopoly economics Essay Monopoly means a market where there is only one seller of a particular good or service. In economics, a monopoly (from the Latin word monopolium – Greek language monos, one + polein, to sell) is defined as a persistent market situation where there is only one provider of a product or service. Monopolies are characterized by a lack of economic competition for the good or service that they provide and a lack of viable substitute goods. Monopoly should be distinguished from monopsony, in which there is only one buyer of the product or service; it should also, strictly, be distinguished from the (similar) phenomenon of a cartel. In a monopoly a single firm is the sole provider of a product or service; in a cartel a centralized institution is set up to partially coordinate the actions of several independent providers (which is a form of oligopoly). Characteristics Only one single seller in the market. There is no competition. There are many buyers in the market. The firm enjoys abnormal profits. The seller controls the prices in that particular product or service and is the price maker. Consumers don’t have perfect information. There are barriers to entry. These barriers many be natural or artificial. The product does not have close substitutes. Advantages of monopoly Monopoly avoids duplication and hence wastage of resources. A monopoly enjoys economics of scale as it is the only supplier of product or service in the market. The benefits can be passed on to the consumers. Due to the fact that monopolies make lot of profits, it can be used for research and development and to maintain their status as a monopoly. Monopolies may use price discrimination which benefits the economically weaker sections of the society. For example, Indian railways provide discounts to students travelling through its network. Monopolies can afford to invest in latest technology and machinery in order to be efficient and to avoid competition. Disadvantages of monopoly Poor level of service. No consumer sovereignty. Consumers may be charged high prices for low quality of goods and services. Lack of competition may lead to low quality and out dated goods and services. Advantages Disadvantages of Monopolies A monopoly is a market structure having only one producer or seller of a product or service. Some of the negative aspects of a monopoly include the single business being able to control pricing and charge relatively high prices, exceptional power over the market and a lack of new products being introduced into the market. Monopolies are created by economic, social or political factors. When one entity has control over a natural resource, a monopoly market for that resource is created. An example would be Saudi Arabia where the government has complete control over the oil industry. Monopolies are also formed when companies have copyright or patent rights to a product.

Discrimination in America Essay -- Race Racism Prejudice

Our world has always been faced with the problem of discrimination. It is one of the most discussed topics nowadays and throughout history. In all countries there is most likely at least one type of discrimination that affects different groups of people. The definition of discrimination is the denial of opportunity or equal rights for a specific group of people that may be differentiated by things such as their religion, color of skin, or gender. The world we live in has been struggling with this sensitive subject for as long as we the have record. Many people believe discrimination has made big steps forward, but has it really? If it has, why do people still get turned down, receive hate mail, or get ridiculed simply because they differ from each other. I guess these are questions we must ask ourselves. I guess you could also ask yourself if you have ever called anybody a name, looked at them different or judged them when you did not even know them or understand them. You m ay be thinking "That is not discrimination," but, in fact, it is. Personally, I never felt that I was discriminated against by anyone or discriminated against others until I came to the USA. Even though this country welcomes all immigrants, people still get treated as â€Å"others.† I remember the night when I arrived in the United States and saw so many black people in the airport. My friends and I were pointing at them and saying â€Å"Look, they are black and they are not like us, they are others.† While we were not trying to be rude, it is clear to me now that we were actually being discriminatory. However, I didn’t realize at the time that sooner or later I would be considered as an â€Å"other† also. Even as a good-looking, smart, intelligent European w... ...ome from), the issue of racial discrimination is not as strong but there are some others, such as gender, class and religion discrimination. This is truly a global issue affecting all nations. I closing, I have realized from my arrival in America that diverse people will often judge each other by appearance and language rather than on substance. We must accept the fact that while people may get more tolerant, there will always be some sort of discrimination. Instead of giving up, it has just made me stronger as I have learned to adapt and not have a complex about my differences. I am sure there are many stories similar to mine that can be used as examples of discrimination. The United States has not solved this problem, but there are a lot of things that have been done in this country in order to have equal rights so that fewer people are treated like â€Å"others.†

Ethics and Utilitarianism Essay

What is Utilitarianism? Utilitarianism is an ethical framework for effective moral action. It’s a philosophical concept that holds an action to be held right if it tends to promote happiness for the greatest number of people. The essence of utilitarianism is in its concept of pleasure and pain. It defines the morally right actions as those actions that maximize pleasure or happiness and minimize pain or evil. Utilitarianism is all about making the right choices that will consequently promote the greatest amount of happiness. It can be traced all the way back to the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus, but the name most frequently associated with utilitarianism is that of Jeremy Bentham. According to utilitarianism, we should evaluate an action by looking at is consequences, weighing the good effects against the bad effects on all the people affected by it. If the good outweighs the bad, it tends to be a good action; if the bad outweigh the good, it tends to be a bad action. (DeGeorge 45) Ethical principles and theories are the foundations of ethical analysis because bring significant characteristics to the decision-making process. Every single theory shows different points such as predicting the outcome and following one’s duties to others in order to reach an ethical decision. But an ethical theory can only to be useful if the theory is directed towards a common set of goals. Ethical principles are the common goals that each theory tries to achieve in order to be successful. These goals include beneficence, least harm, respect for autonomy and justice. Using utilitarianism in ethical business practice would consider the good and bad consequence for everyone the action would affect, treat everybody as having equal rights, with no bias towards self, and would use it as an objective, quantitative way to make a moral decision. Utilitarianism should be employed in all business decision-making process to maximize effects and minimize negative outcomes. Businesses seek to make a profit. The cost-benefit analysis is a form of utility calculation. Most business often use cost-benefit as a decision making tool. Companies attempt to find out how much something is going to cost them before taking any actions that should result in consequences favorable to everyone involved. Just simply put, the company could make a profit while the consumer benefit from the product. To understand the definitions and concepts of the theory, in relation to business ethics, I will use the Ford Pinto Case as an example. The Ford Pinto was sold with dangerous design faults in the fuel tank in which management knew the problem existed. (bizcovering) In a roll over, the fuel valve had a tendency to leak fuel. That did not stop design and production, they rushed to assemble the vehicle and costs were kept low in order to sell the auto for $2,000. It was successful, until one year four people died and one little boy horribly burned and disfigured. Then there were many other incidents that resulted in Ford being sued and had to pay millions in compensation. The cost-benefit analysis demonstrated an abuse of utilitarian principles to suit their needs, because the engineers were aware of the flaws, yet the company continued to sell the car without safety modifications. Utilitarianism, far from being a self-serving approach to moral issues, demands careful, objective, and impartial evaluation of consequences. This philosophy is based on the belief that the moral and ethical value of one’s action should be judged by the consequence of such action. But utilitarianism states that the morality of an action is best judged by the utility or usefulness of such an action. During the 1980’s, Oliver North had to explain why he lied to congressional committees about his role in the Iran-Contra affair, the sale of U. S. arms to Iran for the release of hostages that were held by Iran, he replied, â€Å"Lying does not come easily to me. But we all had to weigh in the balance the difference between lies and lives. North’s conduct was an example of utilitarianism, his method of justifying his acts of deception is a form of moral reasoning. So long as a course of action produces maximum benefits for everyone, utilitarianism does not care whether the benefits are produced by lies, manipulation, or coercion. Utilitarianism was once a radical philosophy. It attempted to set forth a moral system apart from divine revelation and biblical morality. Utilitarianism focused on results rather than rules. But now has been embraced by so many simply because it seems to make a good deal of sense and seems relatively simple to apply. It provided for a way for people to live moral lives apart from the Bible and its rules. Logic rather than obedience to biblical principles guides the ethical decision-making of utilitarianism. While Jeremy Bentham developed his ethical system around the idea of pleasure and built it on ancient hedonism which pursued physical pleasure and avoided physical pain; John Stuart Mill modified this philosophy and developed it apart from Bentham’s hedonistic foundation. Mill used the same utilitarian calculus but instead focused on maximizing the general happiness by calculating the greatest good for the greatest number. Whereas Bentham established act utilitarianism, Mill established rule utilitarianism. Act utilitarian holds that each individual action, in all its concreteness and in all its details, is what should be to the utilitarian test. (DeGeorge 47) Rule utilitarian holds that utility applies appropriately t classes of actions rant than to given individual actions. (DeGeorge 48) According to Mill, one determines what is right by comparing the consequences of all relevant factors of diffeerent rules for a specific circumstance. In conclusion, utilitarianism is all about making the right choices that will consequently promote the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Work Cited DeGeorge, Richard T. Business Ethics. 7th Ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. 2010 â€Å"Applying Utilitarianism to Business Ethics: The Ford Pinto Case. † Annie Lundy February 6, 2009 â€Å"Utilitarianism. † utilitarianism. com. Henry R. West. n. d. â€Å"Calculating Consequences: The Utilitarian Approach to Ethics. † Claire Andre and Manuel Velasquez. n. d.

A Mother Daughter Relationship Essay

Most parents expect many things from their children but most importantly wish their children to be successful and happy, but parents hold different expectations based on their child’s gender. The expectations that both mothers have are common because both of them have daughters. These differences in expectations of gender can be seen in literature such as Girl by Jamaica Kincaid where she will list everything a women is expected of doing in the house and in Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been? by Joyce Carol Oates, the mother argues with her daughter to be more like her sister which is portrayed to be perfect. Both of these mothers have high expectation in their daughters and show them tough love in their parenting. Mothers expect more from their daughters to be successful and by satisfying gender roles that society has made for them. Both mothers in the literature show their interest in their daughters by pleasing certain gender roles. In Girl we can tell her mother is listing what her daughter is expected to do in the house to become the perfect housewife and she must also act a certain way into becoming a lady. In Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been? Connie’s mother always compares her to her sister June; the mother favors June over Connie and wants her to be more like her sister. June is everything her mother wants in a daughter while Connie is not. â€Å"A traditional gender role orientation emphasizes differences between men and women and assumes that each sex has a natural affinity to particular behaviors. Those who maintain a traditional gender role orientation are likely to be influenced by the rules and rituals of the generations that came before them, by their parents and grandparents† (Blackstone 335). This quote from Amy Blackstone explains that gender roles are affiliated with previous generations of the family, which can indicate that the mothers are passing down to their daughters what they have learned from their childhood with their own mothers. Mothers often want their daughters to follow their footsteps and have certain types of criteria that have to be met by them. In most cases, this creates a communication barrier between the  two and often leading them to have conflict among their relationship. We see this happening more in the literature of Girl when her mother states â€Å" this is how you iron your father’s khaki pants so that they don’t have a crease†¦ this is how you sweep a corner; this is how you sweep a whole house; this is how you sweep a yard† (Kincaid 47). The mother teaches her daughter how to iron and clean the way she knows how to, implicating that she must follow her mothers footsteps because this is the right way and that she must do it when one day she gets married or has a house. But not all daughters have the same opinions as their mothers, which can result in having a communication barrier as we can see in Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been? the story states â€Å"Connie’s mother kept picking at her until Connie wished her mother was dead and she herself was dead and it was all over.† (Oates 324). Connie’s mother picks on her daughter so much in the story that it makes Connie not want to have any relationship with her mother by wishing both of them death. According to Estherann Grace who has a masters degree in adolescent medicine said, â€Å"The strength of the mother/daughter bond contributes to the intensity of the emotional response both negatively and positively. This closeness stems somewhat from the expected psychological identification of a developing adolescent becoming a woman, following in her mother’s footsteps. The teenager needs to clarify the differences to establish her own identity.† (Grace 414) In order to solve their differences Connie needs to talk to her mother about the problems they both have and talk to each other about their point of views and figure out the underlying message why her mother and her don’t get along. Both mothers from the short stories show tough love for their daughters as one of their parenting techniques. For Girl the mother tells her daughter â€Å"on Sundays try to walk like a lady and not like the slut you are so bent on becoming† (Kincaid 47), she tells this to her daughter because she secretly cares about how her daughter will turn out to be as a woman. The mother uses a form of reverse psychology so her daughter can prove her wrong that she will not become a slut that her mother thinks she will become. In Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been? her mother proclaims to Connie saying â€Å"Why don’t you keep your room clean like your sister? How’ve you got your hair fixed- what the hell stinks? Hair spray? You don’t see your sister using that junk.† (Oates 323) The mother complains to Connie to her because she wants her to become  just like her older daughter since she seems to believe that her oldest became successful and that Connie is doing the complete opposite of the mother’s expectations. But in Connie’s point of view she rebels to being anything like her sister because she has her own personality and doesn’t want to follow someone else’s footsteps. According to Gregory Patterson â€Å"Kids need more parental involvement. Whether it’s in setting high expectations and then holding children accountable, or by being closely and continuously involved as you set and hold high standards.†(Patterson 4) With this being said, Patterson would approve of the relationships that both mothers have with their daughters because it makes the parent become more involved with their children lives since its giving the child to hold high expectations of the parent which later on will lead to positive outcomes to the child. Although these mothers have unique ways of parenting, other parents might say this type of parenting can result of psychological abuse to their daughters. Psychological abuse is the parent’s behavior that can aggressively harm their child’s mental health (McCoy and Keen 123). We can see this psychological abuse for both literatures, in Girl her mother refers to the daughter to be turning into a slut, which will deliberately hurt the daughter’s feelings. Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been? the mother tells Connie to stop acting like she’s pretty because she’s not. Connie states that these words are familiar to her indicating that her mother verbally attacks her often which results into a psychological abuse. As stated by Monica McCoy and Stefanie Keen, â€Å"parents with good intentions may become verbally aggressive†¦whether the parent deliberately ignored the child, intended to harm the child with harsh words, or behaved out of ignorance.† (McCoy and Keen 125) The quote explains that even parents who have good intentions to their child can still accidently harm them with harsh words that can cause the psychological abuse towards the children. In conclusion, mothers expect more from their daughters to succeed in life with what the mother has provided to them varying from everyday life to academics and also by satisfying gender roles that society has made for women. While some of these gender roles can be protested by their daughters, it will most likely create communication barriers between their mothers relationship and cause several problems between the two. As a parenting  technique both the mothers have portrayed themselves as very harsh and heartless mothers but in all realty this points out that they have good intentions for being so strict on their daughters. Both mothers use though love in their parenting to show what their daughters are expected of and to hopefully guide their daughters in life with what the mother has taught them. Works Cited Blackstone, Amy. â€Å"Gender Roles and Society.† Human Ecology: An Encyclopedia of Children, Families, Communities, and Environments, (2003) 335-338 Grace, Estherann. â€Å"Mothers and Daughters: The Challenge of Communicating.† Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology, 19.6 (2006): 413-414. Keen, Stefanie M., and Monica McCoy. Child Abuse and Neglect. New York and London: Psychology Press, 2014. Print. Kincaid, Jamaica. Girl. Backpack Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, Drama, and Writing. Ed. X.J. Kennedy and Dana Gioia. 4th ed. New York: Person Longman, 2012. 46-50 Oates, Joyce Carol. Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been. Backpack Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, Drama, and Writing. Ed. X.J. Kennedy and Dana Gioia. 4th ed. New York: Person Longman, 2012. 323-337 Patterson, Gregory A. â€Å"Tough Love is Two Words – and Two Necessities.† Phi Delta Kappan, 93.5 (2012): 4.

Vocabulary Week 1 Essays - Language, Learning To Read, Lexicography

Vocabulary Week 1 Essays - Language, Learning To Read, Lexicography Vocabulary Week 1 Antebellum: Before war Antigovernment: Against the government Bi weekly: appearing or taking place every two weeks or twice a week. Circumnavigate: go around or across (something). Connection: Anything that connects Define: state or describe exactly the nature, scope, or meaning of. Discharge: tell (someone) officially that they can or must leave, in particular. Equity: the quality of being fair and impartial. Extraordinary: very unusual or remarkable. International: existing, occurring, or carried on between two or more nations. Introduce: bring (something, especially a product, measure, or concept) into use or operation for the first time. Malnourished: suffering from malnutrition. Misconception: a view or opinion that is incorrect because it is based on faulty thinking or understanding. Non Existent: not existing, or not real or present. Postgame: After the game Pregame: Before the game Semicircle: Half a circle Subway: an underground electric railroad. Superhero: a benevolent fictional character with superhuman powers Synergy: the interaction or cooperation of two or more organizations Triangle: Three sides of a triangle Unbelievable: not able to be believed Vocabulary Week 2 Anarchy: a state of disorder due to absence or non-recognition of authority. Haggard: Always exhausted or tired Homicide: Murder Musician: Professional music player Adrenalitis: Inflammation of the adrenal gland. Aquamarine: a precious stone consisting of a light bluish-green variety of beryl. Audible: capable of being heard Antebellum: Before war Capacity: the ability to hold Decide: To cut off uncertainty Biodiversity: the diversity of plant and animal life in a particular habitat Autopilot: a cognitive state in which you act without self-awareness Export: sell or transfer abroad Inscription: a short dedication written in a book or engraved on something, Anthropology: science dealing with the origin, races, customs, and beliefs of humankind Dictate: issue commands or orders for Credential: a document that proves a person is believable Century: is a period of time equal to one-hundred years. Neologism: a newly invented word or phrase Adequate: If you have an adequate amount of something, it is either enough or just enough. Accede: assent or agree to a demand, request, or treaty. Dismiss: to send someone out Centrifugal: tending to move away from a center Bibliography: list of books Anthropology: the social science that studies the origins and social relationships of human beings Vocabulary Week 3 Homosapien: Human Kind Spectacular: Looks amazing Abduct: To kidnap Deference: Show respect Pendulum: A weight hung from a fixed point to sway Microbe: A germ Hydrate: Activated by water Photobiotic: Requires light to live Panacea: A cure for Illness Pentagon: Five sided shape Television: Watch TV from far away Video: Watching TV Omniana: Bits of information Excel: To surpass Polynomial: Many numbers Recycle: To use it again Hypochrosis: Lack of hemogoblin Pseudosim: A tendency to that which is false Neural: Nerve Craniatomy: Remove of the skull Hematic: Contains blood Proto Robot: Earliest form of a robot Polyphonic: Many sounds Monomial: One number Vital: Relating to life Vocabulary Week 4 Morph: Change shape Vest: Inside shirt Benefit: An advantage Corpse: Dead body Patriarch: Head of the family Noveu: French for new Punctuation: Ending of a sentence Eject: Throw out Diction: Choice of words Locomotion: Movement from place to place Adoxal: Without the right reason Amphibious: Capable of living in water and without Magnanimously: Generously Eulogy: Words of praise Endocardial: Within the heart Aerophobia: Scared of being in the air Orthodontist: Dentist that straightens teeth Verify: To check if its true Matriarch: Head of the family Mega Soda: Large Soda Populace: The people Sanguinary: Bloodthirsty Vocabulary Week 5 Vital: Required to live Democracy: Government of the people Stereotype: To fix in lasting form Alcoholism: Addiction to alcohol Recognition: The state of being noticed Surcharge: Over the price Alternative: Different Asterisk: Tiny star Dynamite: If triggered, it can make an explosion Chronic: Continuing for a long time Hypercritical: Too demanding Demilune: Half moon Octagon: Eight sided shape Autogyro: An airplane that can fly itself Contradict: Opposite Geocentric: Earth was the centre Heliocentric: Sun was the centre Thermostat: Regulates temperature Tetragon: Four sided shape Centimeter: 1/100 of a meter Bioscope: Measuring time Unison: All the sounds at the same time Decagon: Ten sided shape Stellar: Stars Amateur: Someone who is new to an activity that he/she likes

The Causes and Aims of World War One

The Causes and Aims of World War One The traditional explanation for the start of World War 1 concerns a domino effect. Once one nation went to war, usually defined as Austria-Hungary’s decision to attack Serbia, a network of alliances which tied the great European powers into two halves dragged each nation unwillingly into a war which spiraled ever larger. This notion, taught to schoolchildren for decades, has now been largely rejected. In The Origins of the First World War, p. 79, James Joll concludes: The Balkan crisis demonstrated that even apparently firm, formal alliances did not guarantee support and co-operation in all circumstances.† This doesn’t mean that the formation of Europe into two sides, achieved by treaty in the late nineteenth / early twentieth centuries, isn’t important, just that the nations were not trapped by them. Indeed, while they divided Europe’s major powers into two halves - The ‘Central Alliance’ of Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy, and the Triple Entente of France, Britain and Germany - Italy actually changed sides. In addition, the war was not caused, as some socialists and anti-militarists have suggested, by capitalists, industrialists or arms manufacturers looking to profit from conflict. Most industrialists stood to suffer in a war as their foreign markets were reduced. Studies have shown that industrialists did not pressure governments into declaring war, and governments did not declare war with one eye on the arms industry. Equally, governments did not declare war simply to try and cover up domestic tensions, like the independence of Ireland or the rise of socialists. Context: The Dichotomy of Europe in 1914 Historians recognize that all the major nations involved in the war, on both sides, had large proportions of their population who were not only in favor of going to war, but were agitating for it to happen as a good and necessary thing. In one very important sense, this has to be true: as much as politicians and the military might have wanted the war, they could only fight it with the approval – greatly varying, maybe begrudging, but present - of the millions of soldiers who went off to fight. In the decades before Europe went to war in 1914, the culture of the main powers was split in two. On the one hand, there was a body of thought – the one most often remembered now - that war had been effectively ended by progress, diplomacy, globalization, and economic and scientific development. To these people, who included politicians, large-scale European war had not just been banished, it was impossible. No sane person would risk war and ruin the economic interdependence of the globalizing world. At the same time, each nation’s culture was shot through with strong currents pushing for war: armaments races, belligerent rivalries and a struggle for resources. These arms races were massive and expensive affairs  and were nowhere clearer than the naval struggle between Britain and Germany, where each tried to produce ever more and larger ships. Millions of men went through the military via conscription, producing a substantial portion of the population who had experienced military indoctrination. Nationalism, elitism, racism and other belligerent thoughts were widespread, thanks to greater access to education than before, but an education that was fiercely biased. Violence for political ends was common  and had spread from Russian socialists to British women’s rights campaigners. Before war even began in 1914, the structures of Europe were breaking down and changing. Violence for your country was increasingly justified, artists rebelled and sought new modes of expression, new urban cultures were challenging the existing social order. For many, war was seen as a test, a proving ground, a way to define yourself which promised a masculine identity and an escape from the ‘boredom’ of peace. Europe was essentially primed for people in 1914 to welcome war as a way to recreate their world through destruction. Europe in 1913 was essentially a tense, warmongering place where, despite a current of peace and obliviousness, many felt war was desirable. The Flashpoint for War: the Balkans In the early twentieth century, the Ottoman Empire was collapsing, and a combination of established European powers and new nationalist movements were competing to seize parts of the Empire. In 1908 Austria-Hungary took advantage of an uprising in Turkey to seize full control of Bosnia-Herzegovina, a region they had been running but which was officially Turkish. Serbia was livid at this, as they wished to control the region, and Russia was also angry. However, with Russia unable to act militarily against Austria – they simply hadn’t recovered enough from the disastrous Russo-Japanese war – they sent a diplomatic mission to the Balkans to unite the new nations against Austria. Italy was next to take advantage and they fought Turkey in 1912, with Italy gaining North African colonies. Turkey had to fight again that year with four small Balkan countries over land there – a direct result of Italy making Turkey look weak and Russia’s diplomacy - and when Europe’s other major powers intervened no one finished satisfied. A further Balkan war erupted in 1913, as Balkan states and Turkey warred over territory again to try and make a better settlement. This ended once more with all partners unhappy, although Serbia had doubled in size. However, the patchwork of new, strongly nationalistic Balkan nations largely considered themselves to be Slavic, and looked to Russia as a protector against nearby empires like Austro-Hungary and Turkey; in turn, some in Russia looked at the Balkans as a natural place for a Russian-dominated Slavic group. The great rival in the region, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, was afraid this Balkan nationalism would accelerate the breakdown of its own Empire  and was afraid Russia was going to extend control over the region instead of it. Both were looking for a reason to extend their power in the region, and in 1914 an assassination would give that reason. The Trigger: Assassination In 1914, Europe had been on the brink of war for several years. The trigger was provided on June 28th, 1914, when  Archduke Franz Ferdinand  of Austria-Hungary was visiting Sarajevo in Bosnia on a trip designed to irritate Serbia. A loose supporter of the ‘ Black Hand’, a Serbian nationalist group, was able to assassinate the Archduke after a comedy of errors. Ferdinand wasn’t popular in Austria – he had ‘only’ married a noble, not a royal - but they decided it was the perfect excuse to threaten Serbia. They planned to use an extremely  one-sided  set of demands to provoke a war – Serbia was never meant to actually agree to the demands – and fight to end Serbian independence, thus strengthening the Austrian position in the Balkans. Austria expected the war with Serbia, but in case of war with Russia, they checked with Germany beforehand if it would support them. Germany replied yes, giving Austria a ‘blank check’. The Kaiser and other civilian leaders believed swift action by Austria would seem like the result of emotion and the other Great Powers would stay out, but Austria prevaricated, eventually sending their note too late for it to look like anger. Serbia accepted all but a few clauses of the ultimatum, but not all, and Russia was willing to go to war to defend them. Austria-Hungary had not deterred Russia by involving Germany, and Russia had not deterred Austria-Hungary by risking the Germans: bluffs on both sides were called. Now the balance of power in Germany shifted to the military leaders, who finally had what they had been coveting for several years: Austria-Hungary, which had seemed loathe to support Germany in a war, was about to embark on a war in which Germany could take the initiat ive and turn into the much greater war it desired, while crucially retaining Austrian aid, vital for the  Schlieffen Plan. What followed was the five major nations of Europe – Germany and Austria-Hungary on one side, France, Russian and Britain on the other – all pointing to their treaties and alliances in order to enter into the war many in each nation had wanted. The diplomats increasingly found themselves sidelined and unable to stop events as the military took over. Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia to see if they could win a war before Russia arrived, and Russia, who pondered just attacking Austria-Hungary,  mobilized  against both them and Germany, knowing this meant Germany would attack France. This let Germany claim victim status and mobilize, but because their plans called for a quick war to knock Russia’s ally France out before Russian troops arrived, they declared war on France, who declared war in response. Britain hesitated and then joined, using Germany’s invasion of Belgium to mobilize the support of the doubters in Britain. Italy, who had an agreement with Germany, refused to do anything. Many of these decisions  were  increasingly taken by the military, who gained ever more control of events, even from national leaders who sometimes got left behind: it took a while for the Tsar to be talked round by pro-war military, and the Kaiser wavered as the military carried on. At one point the Kaiser instructed Austria to cease trying to attack Serbia, but people in Germany’s military and government first ignored him, and then convinced him it was too late for anything but peace. Military ‘advice’ dominated over diplomatic. Many felt helpless, others elated. There were people who tried to prevent the war at this late stage, but many others were infected with jingoism and pushed on. Britain, who had the least explicit obligations, felt a moral duty to defend France, wished to put down German imperialism, and technically had a treaty guaranteeing Belgium’s safety. Thanks to the empires of these key belligerents, and thanks to other nations entering the conflict, the war soon involved much of the globe. Few expected the conflict to last more than a few months, and the public was generally excited. It would last until 1918, and kill millions. Some of those who expected a long war were Moltke, the head of the German army, and Kitchener, a key figure in the British establishment. War Aims: Why each Nation went to War Each nation’s government had slightly different reasons for going, and these are explained below: Germany: A Place in the Sun and Inevitability Many members of the German military and government were convinced that a war with Russia was inevitable given their competing interests in the land between them and the Balkans. But they had also concluded, not without justification, that Russia was militarily much weaker now than it would be should it continue to industrialize and modernize its army. France was also increasing its military capacity – a law making conscription last three years was passed against opposition – and Germany had managed to get stuck in a  naval race  with Britain. To many influential Germans, their nation was surrounded and stuck in an arms race it would lose if allowed to continue. The conclusion was that this inevitable war must be fought sooner, when it could be won, than later. War would also enable Germany to dominate more of Europe and expand the core of the German Empire east and west. But Germany wanted more. The German Empire was relatively young and lacked a key element that the other major empires – Britain, France, Russia – had: colonial land. Britain owned large parts of the world, France owned a lot too, and Russia had expanded deep into Asia. Other less powerful powers owned colonial land, and Germany coveted these extra resources and power. This craving for colonial land became known as them wanting ‘A Place in the Sun’. The German government thought that a victory would allow them to gain some of their rivals’ land. Germany was also determined to keep Austria-Hungary alive as a viable ally to their south  and support them in a war if necessary. Russia: Slavic Land and Government Survival Russia believed that the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian Empires were collapsing  and that there would be a reckoning over who would occupy their territory. To many Russia, this reckoning would be largely in the Balkans between a pan-Slavic alliance, ideally dominated by (if not entirely controlled by) Russia, against a pan-German Empire. Many in the Russian court, in the ranks of the military officer class, in the central government, in the press and even among the educated, felt Russia should enter and win this clash. Indeed, Russia was afraid that if they didn’t act in decisive support of the Slavs, as they had failed to do in the Balkan Wars, that Serbia would take the Slavic initiative and destabilize Russia. In addition, Russia had lusted over Constantinople and the Dardanelles for centuries, as half of Russia’s foreign trade traveled through this narrow region controlled by the Ottomans. War and victory would bring greater trade security. Tsar Nicholas II was cautious, and a faction at court advised him against war, believing the nation would implode and revolution would follow. But equally, the Tsar was being advised by people who believed that if Russia didn’t go to war in 1914, it would be a sign of weakness which would lead to a fatal undermining of the imperial government, leading to revolution or invasion. France: Revenge and Re-conquest France felt it had been humiliated in the Franco-Prussian war of 1870 – 71, in which Paris had been besieged and the French Emperor had been forced to personally surrender  with  his army. France was burning to restore its reputation and, crucially, gain back the rich industrial land of Alsace and Lorraine which Germany had won off her. Indeed, the French plan for war with Germany, Plan XVII, focused on gaining this land above everything else. Britain: Global Leadership Of all the European powers, Britain was arguably the least tied into the treaties which divided Europe into two sides. Indeed, for several years in the late nineteenth century, Britain had consciously kept out of European affairs, preferring to focus on its global empire while keeping one eye on the balance of power on the continent. But Germany had challenged this  because it too wanted a global empire, and it too wanted a dominant navy. Germany and Britain thus began a naval arms race in which politicians, spurred on by the press, competed to build ever stronger navies. The tone was one of violence, and many felt that Germany’s upstart aspirations would have to be forcibly slapped down. Britain was also worried that a Europe dominated by an enlarged Germany, as victory in a major war would bring, would upset the balance of power in the region. Britain also felt a moral obligation to aid France and Russia because, although the treaties they’d all signed didn’t require Britain to fight, it had basically agreed to, and if Britain remained out either her former allies would finish victorious but extremely bitter, or beaten and unable to support Britain. Equally playing on their mind was a belief that they had to be involved to maintain great power status. As soon as war began, Britain also had designs on German colonies. Austria-Hungary:  Long-Coveted  Territory Austria-Hungary was desperate to project more of its crumbling power into the Balkans, where a power vacuum created by the decline of the Ottoman Empire had allowed nationalist movements to agitate and fight. Austria was particularly angry at Serbia, in which a Pan-Slavic nationalism was growing which Austria feared would lead to either Russian domination in the Balkans, or the total ousting of Austro-Hungarian power. The destruction of Serbia was deemed vital in keeping Austria-Hungary together, as there were near twice as many Serbs within the empire as were in Serbia (over seven million, versus over three million). Revenging the death of  Franz Ferdinand  was low on the list of causes. Turkey: Holy War for Conquered Land Turkey entered into secret negotiations with Germany and declared war on the Entente in October 1914. They wanted to regain land which had been lost in both the Caucuses and Balkans, and dreamed of gaining Egypt and Cyprus from Britain. They claimed to be fighting a holy war to justify this. War Guilt / Who was to Blame? In 1919, in the Treaty of Versailles between the victorious allies and Germany, the latter had to accept a ‘war guilt’ clause which explicitly stated that the war was Germany’s fault. This issue – who was responsible for the war – has been debated by historians and politicians ever since. Over the years trends have come and gone, but the issues seem to have polarised like this: on one side, that Germany with their blank cheque to Austria-Hungary and rapid, two front mobilization was chiefly to blame, while on the other was the presence of a war mentality and colonial hunger among nations who rushed to into to extend their empires, the same mentality which had already caused repeated problems before war finally broke out. The debate has not broken down ethnic lines: Fischer blamed his German ancestors in the sixties, and his thesis has largely become the mainstream view. The Germans were certainly convinced war was needed soon, and the Austro-Hungarians were convinced they had to crush Serbia to survive; both were prepared to start this war. France and Russia were slightly different, in that they weren’t prepared to start the war, but went to lengths to make sure they profited when it occurred, as they thought it would. All five Great Powers were thus prepared to fight a war, all fearing the loss of their Great Power status if they backed down. None of the Great Powers was invaded without a chance to step back. Some historians go further: David Fromkin’s ‘Europe’s Last Summer’ makes a powerful case that the world war can be pinned on Moltke, head of the German General  Staff, a man who knew it would be a terrible, world changing war, but thought it inevitable and started it anyway. But  Joll  makes an interesting point: â€Å"What is more important than the immediate responsibility for the actual outbreak of war is the state of mind that was shared by all belligerents, a state of mind that envisaged the probable imminence of war and its absolute necessity in certain circumstances.† (Joll  and Martel, The Origins of the First World War, p. 131.) The Dates and Order of the Declarations of War

Agency theory Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 4000 words

Agency theory - Essay Example At this stage, agency theory is superseded by what is called stakeholder theory. The same not having been clearly defined, modern scholars advocate the theory called â€Å"enlightened stakeholder theory† which seeks to remove the shortcomings in the traditional stakeholder theory so that managers who could take shelter under the traditional stakeholder theory and avoid accountability, are now compelled to show performance for value maximisation in the long run. This is sought to be achieved by active participation of agents/managers through proper motivation and communication with a scorecard on hand. Thus the enlightened theory would go a long way in plugging the loopholes in the corporate governance occurring in spite legislations like Cadbury report, Greenbury report in the U.K. and SOX Act in the U.S.A. Corporate Governance is a much-discussed issue of public importance, of late. One aspect of the issue is the corporate ownership and control which this proposal deals with. In the discussion here, the word ‘corporate’ is loosely described as firm, company, corporation etc, which all refer to public-owned companies listed in stock exchanges. Share-holder activism all over the global corporate environment has given rise to the study of corporate ownership and control and their impact on the performance of the corporates. By 1990 Corporate Governance had become a household name in the United States of America when a California based pension fund company â€Å"California Public Employees Retirement System’’ (CalPERS) that had invested members’ funds in the shares of leading companies, pioneered by questioning those listed companies’ practice of buying back shares from the share holders at higher prices which meant draining of companies’ c apital and in turn reduction in value of shares held by them. This was soon followed suit by many contemporary companies representing widely dispersed shareholders around the world